Truth or Dare

The Baseball Hall of Fame induction ceremonies took place last weekend. Bruce Sutter along with 17 negro leaguers were inducted. First of all I can't believe that Bruce Sutter made the Hall before Goose Gossage. Goose was, in my mind, the greatest reliever of his era. His numbers are better than Sutter's and it just amazes me that the majority of Hall voters don't see this. Anyway, that's an topic for another day. The talk this weekend was about what the voters will do about Mark McGwire in the upcoming election.

This years ballots will include Tony Gwynn and Cal Ripken Jr. for the first time. They are both virtually assured of being elected in their first year of eligibility. McGwire was once thought to also be a lock for induction in his first year of eligibility, which would have made the Hall of Fame class of '07 one of the most memorable of all time. However, the steroids scandal changed that.

McGwire was one of five current or former players called to testify in front of Congress last year. Sammy Sosa gave an embarrassing performance in which he basically claimed to not to understand English. Palmiero told Congress that he had never taken PED's, only to fail a drug test a month later and be suspended from baseball. Palmiero's career is basically over as is Sosa's. Neither was offered a contract this year and both are for all intents and purposes, retired. Jose Canseco said that everyone was on steroids and Curt Schilling, while acknowledging a problem, said that it was not as widespread as Canseco claimed. McGwire refused to talk about any problems or abuse of steroids that may have taken place while he was playing and he refused to talk about his own PED use. He admitted to nothing, but his image took a beating that day.

McGwire was in a unique position that day to perhaps take a stand against steroid use in baseball. He was one of the most, if not the most popular player in baseball during his last 5 years of his career. Thousands of people would show up early to his games just to watch him take batting practice and the fans in the stands would scramble to retrieve one of his BP home run balls. His chase and ultimate breaking of the single season home run record was front page news across the country. His home run power became almost mythical. So there he sat, in front of Congress, with a chance to come clean about his part in the steroid mess and he chose to say practically nothing. Writers and commentators have talked since then about the fact that his failure to come clean has hurt his Hall of Fame chances. In fact, it's more than likely that he will not be voted into the Hall of Fame this year.

So did he do the right thing but not admitting any steroid use? You're damn right he did. For years every sports writer in this country who talked about the Pete Rose situation said that all he had to do was come clean and everyone would forgive him. Well Pete wrote a book in which he admitted to betting on Baseball after over 15 years of denying it. Do you know what happened to him? He was crucified. The sentiment to put him in the Hall, which was leaning in his direction before the book, turned in opposite direction so quickly that it made his head spin. People were saying that he wasn't contrite enough and that since he admitted to gambling on Baseball that he should never be allowed in the Hall. Writers, who for years had been asking for an admission and apology from Rose, turned their backs on him after he did what they had been asking him to do.

Mark McGwire may not get into the Hall on his first attempt, but he'll get in eventually. Opinions will soften over time and McGwire, unlike Barry Bonds was actually fairly well liked by the writers who followed the sport. He wasn't the friendliest guy, but he wasn't a jackass either. The worst thing that he could do is to admit to any wrongdoing on his part. That would doom him in the eyes of the sports writers. His best bet is to lay low and hope that over time, the sports writers will change their minds. There is no solid evidence that McGwire ever took steroids. Jose Canseco has said that he injected McGwire with drugs, but that evidence wouldn't hold up in court. Of course McGwire is being judged in the court of public opinion where the standards aren't quite as high. With that being said however, all McGwire has to do is lay low and his day will certainly come.

Bicycle Built for Two

Floyd Landis, the winner of the just completed Tour de France, has apparently tested positive for high levels of testosterone during the race. The results of his tests show elevated levels of testosterone after his remarkable comeback in stage 17 of the race. Landis, who was basically written off after falling 8 minutes behind the leader after the 16th stage, pulled off a remarkable comeback the next day and cut the lead to :30 seconds. His ride was hailed as the greatest one day feat in the history of the event. Now it appears that it was done with the help of an illegal performance enhancing drug(PED).

The sport of cycling has been fraught with allegations of doping for years. Lance Armstrong, the seven time winner of the Tour de France, has never been able to escape from doping allegations. After his improbable comeback from cancer, there have been stories circulating about his drug use. He has never tested positive for anything and he is one of the most tested athletes in history. Before the start of this years Tour, nine riders, including the two pre race favorites were banned from the race after being implicated in a Spanish doping probe. Now the winner of Tour has been caught up in a doping scandal as well.

Outside of Ben Johnson, I've never heard one athlete who was caught for doping, actually admit to doing anything illegal or immoral. I've heard a lot of talk about cough medicines and birth control pills and asthma medications and over the counter supplements and B-12 shots, but never do they just say, "Okay, I did it" (well, except for Jason Giambi and he did that in front of a Grand Jury with a promise of immunity from prosecution from the government). Elite athletes are always looking for something to help separate themselves from the competition and in this day and age, a lot of times that means any legal or illegal method available. And if not illegal, at least immoral.

What price does sports pay for this type of problem. For years, under the old soviet bloc system, athletes were forced to take "supplements" which turned out to be steroids. You only had to look at the East German "women's" swimming team in those days to know that something was going on. Cheating has always existed in sports, whether it's stealing signs in baseball or trying to draw a foul in soccer by pretending to be hurt. However, cheating has a much higher level at this point. The problem with cheating in sports is that it then forces the very elite athletes to also cheat in order to stay on top. The idealistic "level playing field" just doesn't exist anymore. Would Barry Bonds have taken steroids if not for Sammy Sosa and Mark McGwire? Would McGwire and Sosa have taken steroids if opposite field home runs hadn't starting flying off the bats of middle infielders? I bet that they wouldn't have felt the need to. Barry is an ass, but I'm sure that until he saw what his competition was doing to excel, he never gave it a second thought.

I don't believe that the steroid problem affects kids nearly as much as is talked about in the press. Kids aren't stupid. They know what can happen if they take steroids. Kids take steroids for the same reason adults do, they want to get a leg up on the competition. They don't take them because Barry Bonds took them. So the price of elite athletes taking steroids is not a generation of steroid taking kids emulating their heroes, the price is borne by sport itself. The last ten years of baseball will forever be known as the "steroid era". Cycling can't seem to get away from the steroid problem. Many of the Olympic track and field events have been tainted by the PED issue.

Athletes who take PED's not only do potential damage to their bodies, but they do harm to the sport that they compete in. And sometimes that harm is irreparable. However, I don't think that it's a major societal issue. I don't think it says anthing particularly damning about us as a society except that, people will do anything to get ahead. But that's really nothing new. Trying to get a leg up on the competition is basically what every capitalist nation is built on. Perhaps the problem is that we hold our athletes up to a higher standard than we are willing to conform to. Immoral and sometimes illegal business practices are the norm in our society. People who are able to circumvent the system are seen as pioneers and savy business people. Our athletes who are caught trying to do the same are treated like leppers.

It's a shame that Landis is now the latest figure to get his name tainted by this ongoing PED scandal. The thing is that even if he is later cleared of this wrong doing, his name is going to be forever linked with steroids. He's tainted for life. If this allegation proves to be true, then the Tour de France will always have the shadow hanging over it of having awarded it's champions jersey to someone who cheated to get it.

Perhaps it was a naive thought on our part that our athletes were somehow better people just becuase they are able to run faster and jump higher. But the truth is that they aren't better people, they're just people. No better or worse. Cheating goes on in life and it goes on in sports. It always has and it always will.

Pardon the Interruption

I don't really have anything of significance to write about today, so I'm just going to give myself a pat on the back for some of my earlier articles. I'll start out with the Greg Maddux - Randy Johnson article and subsequent follow ups. Maddux started out something like 5-0 with a microscopic ERA. The guys on "Around the Horn" couldn't wait to bury Johnson. They were all sure that Johnson was done and that Maddux was on the verge of another Cy Young season. Not so fast fellas. I said then that based on their recent past history that Maddux would not maintain that level of pitching. Since starting 5-0 with a 1.35 ERA, he has gone 3-11 with an ERA north or 6. I guess those guys on TV really know what they're talking about. Randy Johnson is 11-8 and has a lower ERA than Maddux despite pitching in a superior league. His ERA has been under 3.50 in his last seven starts. I hate to say I told you so, but I told you so.

Before the All-Star break all the commentators on TV were talking about how the wild card would definitely come out of the central and that the Yankees had to win the division to make the playoffs. Now that may still be true, but as we sit here today, the Yankees are exactly 1/2 game out of the wild card lead. So much for the doomsday predictions.

Also this year, the Mets have been getting a lot of press in NY about how they are supposedly the best team in NY. Well, guess what, despite playing in a weaker division and league, they are actually percentage points behind the Yankees as we start action today. I'm not necessarily saying that the Yankees are better than the Mets, but come on, look at the facts before proclaiming the end of the Yankees domination of NY baseball.

By the way, I did pick the Japanese to win the World Baseball Classic and predicted that the Yankees would pick up Sidney(I've never seen a buffet that I didn't like) Ponson, but you're just going to have to take my word for it because I didn't put it in writing. I did however put this little tidbit about the future of Terrel Owens, and thankfully that one is in writing.

Of course I predicted that the English would win the World Cup and that the Isiah Thomas would be fired before Larry Brown. Oh well, I guess I'm not infallible. That's all for now kids. Hopefully something exciting or stupid will happen in the world of sports in the next 24 hours, so I'll have something to write about. Until we meet again, I wish you a fond farewell and a hearty, hi ho Silver, Away!

21 Gun Salute

There is a movement afoot to try and get the number of Roberto Clemente (21) retired by baseball. Baseball has only afforded that tribute to only one player. Jackie Robinson's number (42) was retired by every team in the major leagues a few years ago. Players who were wearing the number were allowed to keep it and at this point, Mariano Rivera is the last active player who will wear the number. It seemed an appropriate way to honor a man who had meant so much to the game and had put up with so much abuse just to share the playing field with his teammates.

Roberto Clemente was a great right fielder for the Pittsburgh Pirates. He collected exactly 3,000 hits in his career. He won four batting titles and has a .317 lifetime batting average. Without a doubt he was one of the best players of the sixties and is probably the greatest Hispanic ballplayer of all time (Arod may hold that title by the end of his playing days). He died tragically in a plane crash while trying to deliver humanitarian aid to the victims of an earthquake in Nicaragua. While he had a great career and died in a very heroic manner, I don' think that he is deserving of having his number retired by major league baseball.

The arguments for baseball bestowing this honor on Clemente, while noble, do not seem to add up for me. Arguments range from, "he is the best Latino ballplayer ever", to "he died in a tragic manner", to "Hispanics represent a big percentage of the majors and they should have one of their own honored". Once again, all are valid statements, but to have his number retired by baseball, I believe would diminish the honor given to Jackie Robinson. Clemente was obviously a very caring human being along with being a great baseball player. However, there have been many other examples of great baseball players who were great human beings as well. Hank Aaron, Stan Musial, Lou Gehrig were all great ballplayers and from all reports, fine people as well. There is no movement to get their numbers retired by baseball.

Jackie Robinson's place in baseball history is secure because of the singular burden that he had to bear. His number wasn't retired because he was the best african-american player of al time, or because he was a fine humanitarian. His number was retired because he and he alone broke the color barrier in baseball. There would have been no Roberto Clemente if not for Jackie Robinson. Hispanic players were in the majors before Clemente got there and many more would follow. He was not a pioneer in the way that Robinson was. Jackie Robinson was a great experiment by baseball. If he would have failed, if he would have lashed out fans or opposing players for verbally abusing him, the experiment would have been deemed a failure and major league baseball could have gone back to being the lily white sport it was before he got there.

I don't want to make it seem like I'm belittling the qualifications of Roberto Clemente. He has been awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom, which is the highest honor that the nation can bestow on a civilian. There are statues, bridges and stadiums that bear his name and likeness. Major League Baseball presents the Roberto Clemente award annually to the player who best follows Clemente's spirit of humanitarian work. He is remembered and honored as few sports figures ever have been. And he is definitely deserving of that praise.

Baseball took the step of retiring Jackie Robinson's number to acknowledge, not only the extraordinary man who wore it, but also to honor the hundreds of men who didn't get a chance to play the game. The men who were kept out of competing in the Major Leagues because of racism and ignorance. I'm not sure that there's a big enough statement that baseball can make to try and atone for that egregious error (the special Hall of Fame vote this year is another big step), but their efforts are ongoing. Roberto Clemente was without a doubt a special player, and people will cite the increase of Hispanic players in the Majors as evidence of his legacy. That would do a disservice to the legacies of all the other great Hispanic players who played along side Clemente. Did players like Juan Marichal, Luis Aparicio, Orlando Cepeda, Tony Oliva, The Alou brothers, Tony Perez, Rod Carew or Luis Tiant, have nothing to do with the influencing of a generation of Hispanic players? Were they so dwarfed by Clemente that no one looked up to them? Didn't one kid from Cuba consider Luis Tiant his hero? Didn't one kid from Panama think that Rod Carew was the best? Wasn't there one boy from Venezuela who wanted to grow up to be like Luis Aparicio?

Roberto Clemente is rightfully respected, honored and even revered by the fans of baseball, but we shouldn't confuse a valiant death off the field with what was accomplished on the field. Clemente place is in the pantheon of great outfielders, but the singular tribute of having your number retired by baseball should remain with the player who made the singular sacrifice to play the game. Being the first and only player with his number retired should remain Jackie's honor alone, just as he was the first and only the day he took the field and changed history with the Brooklyn Dodgers back in 1947.

Jack of all Trades

Once again I find myself in the position of having to defend the past. I've done it in the case of Rod Laver, I've done if for Boxing and of course countless times for Baseball and now I find that I have to do it in Golf. Tiger Woods won the eleventh "major" of his career yesterday and once again the talk is about how many majors he will win and whether he will become the greatest golfer of all time if he doesn't hold that distinction already. The record for wins in major tournaments is either 18 or 20 (depending on whether you count the US Amateur as a major) and both records are held by the greatest golfer of all time, Jack Nicklaus.

Jack's numbers speak for themselves. He has 73 career wins on the PGA tour(including his record 18 majors), he won the US Amateur twice, He won majors over 3 decades (his first in '62 and his last in '86) and he played against some of the greatest golfers of all time and managed to lap the field. The list of Jack's opponents literally reads like a who's who of golf. First it was Arnold Palmer, then it was Gary Player, then Lee Trevino, then Tom Watson, then Seve Ballesteros. That group of players alone has 35 major championships among them. They all had the game to dominate any era of golf and they probably would have dominated to a greater degree if not for Jack. Jack finished 2nd 19 times in majors. That is not a testament to him folding under the pressure, that is a testament to the quality of opponents he was facing every week. If Player, Trevino and Watson aren't around, Jack would probably have about 30 major titles to his credit. Jack also played against near greats like Billy Casper, Hubert Green, Julius Boros, Johnny Miller and Ben Crenshaw.

Tiger's plays regularly against only a couple of players who have won multiple majors. Ernie Els (3), Phil Mickelson (3), Vijay Singh (3) and John Daly (2).Phil hadn't won any majors until 2 years ago and John Daly doesn't pose a consistent threat to anyone except the waitresses at Hooters. The competition Tiger faces simply doesn't hold a candle to what Jack had to face in his day. Perhaps Jack didn't play in the "Golden" era of golf (that designation would go the days of Bobby Jones and Walter Hagen, I suppose), but he certainly played against greatest collection of golfers that the PGA tour has ever had playing at one time. I'm not saying that Jack is a better athlete than Tiger. Today's equipment and training make that a moot point. What I am saying is that sheer numbers are not the only way to measure greatness. Tiger's rivals almost seem to shrink when they see him atop the leader board. For years Phil Mickleson would choke on the final day of majors. David Duval was a major rival of Tiger's in his early years, but has since succumed to a number of injuries. Sergio Garcia was supposed to be a big rival, but has yet to win a major and shoots in the mid 70's on the final day of majors. Jack's opponents relished the opportunity to face him on the final day of a tournament. Lee Trevino and Tom Watson made their reputations by beating Nicklaus during major tournaments.

Some will say that Tiger is so good that his competition simply doesn't stand a chance. That is simply not true. There have two separate stretches of 10 majors in a row where Tiger did not win. That was certainly enough time for one of his rivals to stake a claim as an all time great, but that has not happened. Even when Tiger is not in contention, his rivals have been unable (for the most part) to take advantage of that. Phil, Vijay and Ernie are a cut above the rest of the field, but the record shows that even when Tiger is not winning, they do not have the game to rise much above the rest of the players. Golf commentators have long talked about a true rival for Tiger. Some have come and gone (like Duval), while others have tried and failed to scale the summit that is Tiger Woods. Some commentators have even suggested that Tiger won't have a great rival, but a group of players who push him every week. Jack really had the same thing, only the people pushing every week were the greatest golfers of all time.

Jack was the best of the best, Tiger is the best of the rest. It really is as simple as that.

There's a Screw Lose in that Phillips Head

Steve Phillips, who is the ex-GM of the Phillies and Mets and now works as a commentator for ESPN, makes his living talking about baseball. The only problem with that is that his knowledge of baseball appears to be extremely limited. I'm not sure how someone with his lack of ability to analyze the game, ever rose to the heights that he has. He must have excellent oral skills. You get it? You get it? You don't get it.

Anyway, he put his skills (or lack thereof) on display by saying that he thinks the Blue Jays will pass the Yankees for second place in the AL east. Now this in itself is not a ridiculous statement. The Blue Jays are only three games behind the Yankess and they have shown that they are a much improved team. Phillips shows his complete lack of baseball acumen by talking about the reason that he thinks the Blue Jays can pass the Yankees. He bases his theory on the Blue Jays "top three" pitchers. He said that if he could take any teams top three pitchers in the AL east, he would pick the Blue Jays. There is a reason why Steve Phillips isn't the GM of a major league club anymore.

Let's take a look at the top 3 pitchers on the Blue Jays staff. Roy Halladay, who is a former Cy Young winner and a legitamate candidate for the award this year, has 12 wins. Ted Lilly is a career journeyman pitcher who has nine wins and A.J. Burnett is a known head case who has had arm trouble all year and is 1-3. As a unit they are 22-13. The Red Sox top 3 pitchers (Schilling, Beckett and Lester) are a combined 29-8. The Yankees top 3 pitchers (Wang, Johnson and Mussina) are a combined 31-15. Johnson is definitely going to the hall of fame, is a five time Cy Young winner and World Series MVP, Schilling and Mussina might end up there as well. Beckett is a former World Series MVP and has 12 wins already this year.

Here is the quote from Phillips about the three staffs:

"If everyone stays healthy and performs like I think they can, and taking into account Randy Johnson isn't the same guy he has been in the past, I would take the Blue Jays' three [starters.]"

At this point in all their respective careers, Halladay is probably the best pitcher of the nine. That being said, I don't think that there's a GM or manager in baseball who would pick any of the other two starters on the Blue Jays staff over Randy Johnson, Mike Mussina, Josh Beckett or Curt Schilling. Lester is a rookie, so it's hard to say how he will pan out, but I'm sure most GM's would still take him over Ted Lilly. Steve Phillips is supposed to be able to evaluate talent. He was responsible for making deals and trying to help his teams win. However, it's fairly clear that his judgment is pretty bad. The Blue Jays staff consists of one Cy Young winner, one career .500 pitcher(lilly is 53-53) and one pitcher who is under .500 for his career(Burnett is 50-53). That, in his humblie opinion is the best starting staff in the AL east.

Wow. If the Yankees or the Red Sox had that staff, the papers and fans in both cities would be screaming bloody murder and here's the funny thing, so would Phillips. He's been talking all year about the Yankees lack of pitching, but from his statements it's clear that he doesn't know what a pitching staff is. I guess he would rather have Ted Lilly pitching with the World Series on the line than Curt Schilling or Randy Johnson.

What an Idiot.

Error Message

The Yankees have the 4th best record in baseball. Unfortunately for them, the only teams with better records are the ones keeping them from a playoff spot. They are 1-1/2 games behind the Red Sox, 3 games behind the White Sox and 6 games behind the Tigers. They have just came off a 5-1 homestand and have 9 of their last 11. They are playing very well. Good pitching,timely hitting and few breaks have fueled their recent winning ways.

The much maligned pitching staff, which everyone always claims is a weak spot on the team, has the 5th best ERA and the 3rd best BAA in the American League. Not too shabby for a team that supposedly can't pitch. Clearly they have had problems at the 5th starter spot, but they were the first team in the AL to have 3 pitchers with 10 wins. The Yankees should continue to win at about a .600 clip which would give them about 97 wins for the season. The question this year is whether that is going to be enough to get them in the playoffs.

The Yankess aren't hitting as many home runs as they have in previous years, but that is understandable given the loss of Sheffield and Matsui. They are tied for second in runs scored however. They are still scoring enough runs, they are just doing it in a slightly different way. The Yankees do have their question marks, the most glaring of which would be the set up spot for Mariano Rivera. Farnsworth has been less than consistent up to this point. The Stadium radar gun clocked him at 101 a couple of nights ago, but too often he has seemed afraid to throw his fastball in the strike zone. Octavio Dotel is expected back in the next week or so and should provide the Yanks with some needed help in the 8th inning.

The biggest obstacle to the Yankees making the playoffs (besides the teams that are ahead of them right now)is their defense. In order to go deep in the playoffs or even get to the playoffs the Yanks are going to have to tighten up their defense. Arod is having a sub par defensive year at 3rd, Jeter is no more than adequate at short, Cano is an adventure at 2nd and Melky Cabrera is the only outfielder who can actually throw anyone out. They make too many silly errors and allowing good teams extra outs is always a recipe for disaster. The Yanks have never been the best defensive team in the league, but they really need to get better in the second half. The Yankees are seldom going to win a game because of defense, but they sure as hell can lose them.

It's only July, so nothing is critical right now, but the Yankees need to continue to keep pace with the teams they are chasing. They are in good position to make a push for the playoffs, but it's always better to have someone chasing you than to have to do the chasing.

Second Helping

It's time for the second half of the baseball season to get under way. Of course, we are technically past the half way point, but there's no reason for me to get technical. Anyway, the Yankees find themselves three games behind the Red Sox for first place in the east and six games behind the White Sox for the wild card. I've read many a column that says that the Yankees have no shot at the wild card and that they have to win the east to make the playoffs. First of all, that's simply not true. While six games is a healthy lead at the all star break, it's not unassailable. The Yankees have certainly made up bigger deficits before. Just last year at this point, they were trailing the Red Sox and they had basically lost four starters. They were down to two starters from their original five man rotation. The nay sayers couldn't wait to write about how the Yankees had no chance of making the playoffs. They had no pitching, the team was in shambles. The Yankees somehow managed to turn things around and win the division despite all of their problems. I'm not saying that the Yankees will definitely win the division or even make the playoffs this year, but at this point, it's really far too early to count them out.

Mike Lupica's column today talked about how the onus is on Randy Johnson and Arod to step it up in the second half. This is just more of the usual shit from Lupica. Arod is currently producing at a clip that will net him 40 home runs and 130 rbi's and Johnson is on a pace to win 20 games. What the Yankees need from not only those two, but everyone on the team is consistency. Arod has been hot and cold as has Johnson. The same can said about every player on the team except Derek Jeter and to a lesser extent Mike Mussina and Wang, who have been very consistent throughout the season. Consistency is hard to come by in baseball, but it is what is needed if the Yankees are to continue their playoff streak. Given the injuries to Matsui and Sheffield, the Yankees cannot afford to have one of their key run producers go into an extended slump. In the past, they had various players who could carry the offense if one of their top hitters was going through a slump. That is not the case today. They need consistent production from 1-6 in the lineup. Damon, Jeter, Giambi, Arod, Posada and Cano have to avoid long unproductive periods or the team will not be able to win at the pace needed to overcome their current deficit.

The Red Sox aren't going to collapse in the second half and neither are the White Sox. The Yankees have to hope that they begin to play better baseball and that Detroit starts to play more like the team they actually are. It's not inconceivable that the Yankees could finish up with 95 wins and still fall short of the playoffs. It's also possible that Sheffield and Matsui come back too late the prevent the Yankees from missing the playoffs. With those two in the lineup, the Yankees do have the most potent lineup in baseball, however having them return in September might not be enough to get the team into the playoffs. The Yankees cannot depend on a late push to secure a playoff spot. They must do more than tred water until those players come back. They are expecting bullpen help when Octavio Dotel joins the team sometime in July. That will certainly help shore up their sometimes shaky and definitely overworked bullpen.

The biggest problem the Yankees have is at the 5th starter spot. Shawn Chacon has been ineffective since his return from the DL and unless he steps up immediately in the second half, he will not have his spot in the rotation much longer. There are not a lot of options for the Yankees at this point. Teams are not really willing to part with quality pitchers and most are still in playoff contention. Brian Cashman may have to get lucky with some cast aways (as he did last year with Chacon and Small). However if Chacon can turn it around and Carl Pavano ever comes back, the Yankees will be solid once again in the pitching department. There are rumors of a trade with Philadelphia to bring either Bobby Abreu or Pat Burrell to the Yankees. The Yankees at this point have been unwilling to deal Phillip Hughes in order to get either of those players. If the asking price goes down as the trade deadline approaches, then I could see the Yankees pulling the trigger on one of those deals. Abreu is the more attractive option, considering that his salary would fit right into the slot that's going to be vacated by Sheffield and he only has one year left on his deal. He's also an OBP machine. They Yankees may have to pick up the salary of Jon Lieber in order to get the deal done, but I think it would be worth the cost.

The second half is going to be interesting. I'm looking forward to it. Regardless of what the papers say, I know that the Yankees are going to put up one hell of a fight to get to the playoffs. Now if there's an injury to Mariano in the second half, then they can all start making vacation plans for early October.

Better Late Than Never

It seems FIFA has finally gotten around to fixing their rankings. They have changed their rankings to include games played over the past four years instead of over the past eight. That seems to make more sense since international teams can have a lot of turnover between World Cups. A team from eight years ago may not a single player still on the squad today. Current teams should neither be penalized or profit from games played eight years ago.

They have also given more weight to regional strength and World Cup wins. Not surprisingly the biggest loser in the new ranking system is CONCACAF, which is the North American and Caribbean region. The US and Mexico both took huge dives in the new rankings. Mexico fell from #4 (?????) to #18 and the US fell from #5 to #16. Both of those rankings seem more appropriate to the actual skill level of both teams. The new top five looks like this: Brazil, Italy, Argentina, France, England. It looked like this before the World Cup: Brazil, Czech Republic, Netherlands, Mexico, US. Now which group do you think is more representative of the best soccer teams in the world? Don't worry it's a rhetorical question.

Germany, which was ranked #19 before the tournament started, is now #9. Amazingly they were penalized because they were the host nation of the World Cup. The host nation does not have to qualify for the Cup and under the old system they were penalized for not playing World Cup qualifying matches. That seems totally asinine to me. How can you penalize a team for not playing games that they don't have to play? Bizarre. Well at least they've seen the error of their ways. CONCACAFF will continue to suffer until they start playing better competition. The US and Mexico are not going to get any better playing each other. They need to play the teams in South America if they hope to move up in the rankings again.

I have had some unkind words for the FIFA rankings during the World Cup and it's good to see that they've actually addressed the issue (my kung fu is very strong!). Now if only they'd do something about adding a ref, curbing the flopping and getting rid of shootouts in the World Cup, my victory will be complete. One more suggestion regarding the World Cup, why don't they seed the first round like the NCAA tournament. That way Brazil as the #1 seed would play the #32 team and so on. It would help to avoid the dreaded "group of death" and in my mind would make for a better tournament. Anyway, just a thought.

So I believe I've come to the end of my reports on the World Cup '06. It was fun and hopefully I'll still be here in four years to give my somewhat scattered thoughts again.

Destiny Denied

The World Cup is over and Italy are world champions. I thought that France outplayed them in the second half and in extra time, but they were able to pull it out in penalty kicks. France had destiny on their side and after getting a gift penalty and taking an early 1-0 lead, it looked like they were going to pull off the upset and win the game. Italy tied the game before halftime, however and then relied on their defense and an incredible save by Buffon to maintain the tie.

I really believe the game turned on the bone head foul by Zidane. Destiny is a fickle beast. If you take it for granted, it will leave you to your own devices. I don't really think that there's a similar mistake by a great player in the history of team sports. Babe Ruth did get thrown out trying to steal a base to end the 1926 World Series, but at least he was trying to do something positive to help his team win, however ill conceived it may have been. I guess the closest analogy I can come up with is when Tyson bit off a piece of Holyfield's ear during their rematch. Boxing isn't a team sport, but Tyson did basically lose his mind in the middle of the ring. Zidane snapped on the biggest stage in the sporting world. With an audience of over a billion people, he let his emotions get the better of him, and in doing so, played a huge part in losing the game for France. I'm not sure if they would have scored in extra time, but that missed penalty kick would have somehow found it's way across the goal line. If sentiment or hope or fate or destiny or whatever you want to call it was on France's side up to that point, that single act of stupidity and selfishness eliminated that advantage.

We saw some incredible games over the three and 1/2 weeks of the World Cup. While the Cup lacked a singular star, there were more than enough interesting individual and team stories to keep fans riveted to the action. Of course there are changes I would like to see before the next World Cup in South Africa, the first and foremost being the addition of at least one more official on the pitch. One more official would help to curtail the preponderance of flopping. Players only pretend to be hurt because the official is usually too far away to see if a foul actually occurred. An extra official would help to minimize the bad calls and would cut down on players being rewarded for basically trying to cheat. Limited use of instant replay (at least on penalty kick calls), would also help to level the playing field, so to speak. Also, penalty kicks are no way to decide the winner of a World Cup. They should be done away with in this tournament all together. Could you imagine if the World Series was decided by a home run derby? Or the Superbowl decided by a field goal kicking contest? It really is that ridiculous. They should allow extra substitutes and just play 15 minute periods until a winner is decided. It seems only fair that the game should be decided on the field of play.

It's part of the fun of the World Cup that it only happens once every four years, but as we stand now at the farthest point from the next one, it seems a shame that we have to wait so long to see the best Football players in the world meet to decide world supremacy. Oh well, at least I know that unlike most things, it will be well worth the wait.

Flip Flop

The World Cup final is upon us and since England has let me down for the tenth time in a row, I'll have to make a new pick. It's a difficult game to call. Italy has looked good at times but their flopping makes it hard to watch their games. France hasn't looked good at all. I'm frankly amazed that they've made it this far. They also have an amazing flair for the dramatic. I don't think you can get within three feet of Thiery Henry without him hitting the ground and rolling around like he's been stabbed.

I guess there's some sentiment for France because of Zidane. This is his last international game and since he is one of the greatest players of all time, it would be nice for him to go out on a high note. The Italians on the other hand are in the middle of a gambling scandal that could see some of their most high profile players serving suspensions or getting banned from the game. It would be easy then to paint this one as the guys in the white hats against the guys in the black hats, but it really isn't that simple. The French team was supposedly in disarray when they got to the World Cup because Henry and Zidane didn't get along. They have hooked up for a couple of goals at this point, so I guess that's all in the past now. Of course, it's always amazing what a couple of wins will do for team chemistry.

If I were to pick the game based on the strength of the teams, I would have to go with Italy. They have looked like the more dangerous squad in recent games. France has done just enough to get by. France is also the higher ranked team by FIFA and as this cup has shown, the higher ranked team is not necessarily the better team. The six highest ranked teams by FIFA didn't even make the semi finals. I'll quibble with their ranking system at a later date. So all signs are pointing to Italy and yet, there seems to be something about France that would lead you to believe that they are the team of destiny. They not only needed to win their last game in the qualifying round, but they needed help from Switzerland in order to move on. They got just enough to get out of the first round. They were down to Spain before pulling out the victory. They have managed more than one goal just twice in six games. But destiny is a powerful force and they seem to have it on their side.

Before the World Cup started I told my friend Gary Power about my England pick. He responded by saying that I should have picked a team like Italy. I should have listened to him. Well, since I'm going to be watching the final at Ric Salvatici's house in Boston, surrounded by Italian fans, I basically have no recourse but to pick Italy to win. That is unless it goes to penalty kicks, where the Italians have about as much luck as the English do. That last comment sounded like I was hedging my bets to some extent, so I will say unequivocally that the Italians will win on Sunday.

Of course, I have been wrong once or twice in my life.

Report Card

I just thought I'd give you an mid season report on my pre-season picks (here's the link to my predictions) for the baseball season. I had the Yankees, Indians and A's winning their divisions. Except for the Indians, those picks are still reasonable. I had the White Sox winning the wild card and they are currently in the wild card position. So I'm batting .750 in the AL. In the NL I had the Mets, Brewers and Padres winning their divisions with the Cardinals as the wild card. The Mets are going to win the east, the Padres are tied for first and the Cardinals are in a heated battle in the central. Milwaukee is currently two games out of the wild card, so I'm going to give myself 1.000 batting average for the NL.

I'm not doing as well in predicting award winners. I had Roy Halladay and Rich Harden for the AL Cy Young. Halladay is definitely in the mix but Harden has been felled by arm problems. I had Thome and Arod for the AL MVP, both are still in the mix, though I don't either of them are lead candidates for the award, but that can all change in the second half. You know what? Upon further consideration, I'm going to give myself a .750 average for the AL awards. In the NL I had Jake Peavy and Ben Sheets vying for the Cy Young award. Both have had arm problems. Sheets has been on the DL for most of the first half and Peavy has been pitching in pain. That's a total swing and a miss on the NL Cy Young. However, for MVP I picked probably the two leading candidates for the award in David Wright and Albert Pujols. So even with the whiff on the Cy Young I'm batting a solid .500 for the NL awards.

All in all, I'd have to say I'm not doing too bad at the half way point. Now all we need is for Cleveland to stage a miracle comeback in the second half and I'll have pulled off the greatest feat of prognostication since Moses predicted the seven plagues in Egypt. Okay, maybe not, but it'll be pretty damn impressive.

Mid Season Classic

The mid-season classic also known as the all star game is almost upon us. The same issues that come up every year are yet again being raised. First of all, why does every team have to have a representative. I understand this rule in principle, but when it leads to someone as mediocre as Mark Redmen from the Royals being included, it borders on ridiculous. If this rule is going to be enforced, then they need to add a couple of spots to each roster. Clearly more deserving people are being left off because of the need to have someone from every team. Plus this rule was enacted when there were at least four fewer teams in each league. The rosters have not grown to accommodate that fact.

Next, why isn't DH a position on the all star ballot? It's clearly a position in the American League. It seems silly to have Jim Thome, David Ortiz and Jason Giambi listed as first basemen when the majority of their time is spent at DH. So what if there's no DH in the National league park. Have you ever heard of a pinch hitter? Clearly the pitcher isn't going to hit, so they will need people off the bench to bat for him. I don't know of a more perfect situation to use a designated hitter. That's what the position is for, to hit for the pitcher. It's ridiculous.

The game has been used for the past couple of years to determine home field advantage in the World Series. This doesn't make any sense. It stems from the all star game in Milwaukee a few years ago that ended in a tie. Now it was a mistake for the teams to agree to end that game, but the commissioner over reacted by making the game worth more than it should be. It is after all an exhibition. The goal is for the fans to see the most popular players perform and to not get anybody hurt. By making the game actually "worth" something, the commissioner is really asking for one of the managers to over use the players. The starting pitchers shouldn't go more than two innings and the relievers shouldn't go more than one. The problem is that if the game is close in the late innings and home field advantage is on the line, maybe the manager would be tempted to use Mariano Rivera for more than one inning. Two, three even. It's dangerous and it shouldn't be part of the game.

My last sticking point is with the manager of each of the teams getting to add players at his own discretion. Ozzie Guillen decided to add six of his own players to the team this year. There are certainly players from other teams who are more deserving, but it is the manager of the squad who gets the final say. I guess there's something to a manager being loyal to his players, but it's unfair when you basically use every available spot that you have to pick your own players. Clearly there are more deserving players out there. Of course Ozzie Guillen is an absolute jerk. I really can't wait until that team starts losing. It's going to be amazing how quickly he will go from being amusing and honest to pathetic and bitter.

That's about it for the All star game rant. I'll enjoy the home run derby, at least.